Re: PL/pgSQL 2

On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> Well, I don't think PostgreSQL needs its own PL. I mean we already have
> several (what other database has pl/javascript or pl/python?)

PostgreSQL already *have* it's own PL, it's called PL/pgSQL.

> Besides, the idea of this community trying to build its own programming
> language... oh lord ;)

I would agree it's too much of a challenge to invent a brand new
programming language,
I agree that's unrealistic, that's why I'm opting to do as much as
possible in the existing
language, and carefully think about what non-compatible important
changes we simply
cannot make to PL/pgSQL, as they by definition would break
compatibility (which we all
agree is not acceptable), but that *would* be possible with PL/pgSQL 2.